Shawn Buckley speaks at the Senate Social Affairs Committee debate on Bill C-6

Tonight, Nov 25, Canadian freedom-fighting lawyer Shawn Buckley spoke at at the Senate’s Social Affairs Committee debate on Bill C-6. Alberta Senator Elaine McCoy live-blogged the event… posting on her website here: http://www.albertasenator.ca/hullabaloos/

Here is her summary at the time of posting (5:45pm PDT, 25 Nov 2009) –

Live Blog Bill C-6 – Part 5

Posted By Senator Elaine McCoy Nov 25 2009 02:57PM

The long awaited Shawn Buckley is here at the Senate Social Affairs Committee………

4:55pm So here we are, at last, listening to two lawyers tell us what is wrong with Bill C-6.  The Senator sitting beside me leans over and says Sean Buckley “is very good.” Ms. Cherniak is pointing out that the Bill is “setting up good corporate citizens to fail.”

Senator Eggleton says Health Canada insists it will act under the law.  Of course, says Mr. Buckley.  But there’s an exemption for trespass.  Even the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act requires court oversight.  Why not here, as protected by section 8 of the Charter?

“Is this the slippery slope to state power against individuals without court supervision?”. Good question!  Part of our traditions, I might add, going all the way back to the Magna Carta.

4:59pm: Now Senator Eaton (ON) asks about trespass.  Then she interrupts him and substitutes her own opinion.  She believes Health Canada, not the clear wording of section 20(4) of the Bill. Mr. Buckley calmly refutes her (Health Canada’s) position.

Then other senators try to correct her and another senator who seems to believe the same spin.  The Chair tries to keep it to questions.  Senator Eaton says she disagrees and then says she doesn’t understand what he’s saying.  Hmmmm — not hearing what the lawyer is trying to explain.  She continues to argue. Fortunately, Mr. Buckley keeps his cool.

5:10pm: Now Senator Martin (BC) … sure enough she plays the baby crib story. The debate version of politicians kissing babies, perhaps?

So what’s best for Canadians.  Mr. B. Neatly separates the emotion from the need to protect civil liberties.  It’s procedural fairness, State control vs freedom and the Rule of Law that is the issue here.

Now Senator Martin also disagrees. And begins to sing Health Canada’s song yet once again.

Mr. B talks of a need for review of  executive (State) action.  Amen.

Next comes Senator Segal (ON).

5:19pm: “Health Canada says it’s a reasonable person. What do you say to that, Mr. Buckley?”

“Can you imagine a civil servant saying they want broad powers to act unreasonably?”  A few shy smiles around the table — and a chuckle when he observes he’s never heard Heath Canada called reasonable before today.  Based on extensive experience defending against unreasonable exercise of power.

5:32pm: “Opinion should not colour the law. Statutes should be clear and not subject to how the winds blow”, says Ms. Cherniak.  Mr. Buckley agrees.

Senator Ogilvie (N.S.) takes a run at being a lawyer instead of a mere scientist.  Why oh why is this concept of the Rule of Law so hard to grasp?  Is it because we’ve always had it?  Does no-one remember King John (of Robin Hood fame) in 1215?  Who was so bad his barons held him hostage until he finally signed a “Big Charter” (Magna Carta)?  Whew!

So now Senator Ogilvie also says he disagrees.  Amazing … is he giving evidence too?  Ah well, I suppose it’s just as well to know where he and others on his side of the table are coming from.

5:43pm: Senator Dyck (SK) asks whether the bills goes further than necessary.  She’s a scientist so she understands risk.  But that’s not what she asks — instead she focuses on due process, a legal question.  Mr. Buckley answers again.  The Rule of Law is too important and should not be abandoned.  Senator Dyck is civil enough not to argue with him, whatever her own opinion may be.

6:00pm: At least the heart surgeon amongst us, Senator Keon (ON), understands that no-one should stand above the law.  Fair enough, but that’s why we usually insist on judicial overview to make sure the law is fairly exercised.  Absence of review is tantamount to a total lack of accountability.

The last senator to speak is Joe Day (NB). “It’s not the platitudes of Health Canada we’re being asked to approve.  It’s the words written down.”. Ah, well said.  Mind you, he is carrying on and on refuting previous senatorial oratorical positions ….

But time is up.  The Chair says we have to go … and so we will.  A good session, all things considered.  Powerful points were made and received.  Now it’s up to the Committee to treat ALL evidence with respect.

http://www.albertasenator.ca/hullabaloos